He is living in 1995 lol

Post creds or alternately the internet articles you are reading.....

I don’t doubt the oil formulation was updated.

All I’m saying is that depending on stock being updated everywhere is not good enough for someone who cares about their engine.  That’s why relying on the manual (manufacturers original specifications) and the hope that all oils you have access to are appropriate is not good enough imo.  

And yes, I was talking about the noack testing earlier.  One can’t always easily find the results published.  

Even today Ford and Honda both (I’m unsure about other manufacturers) are building direct injection engines without port injection.  Finding an oil that meets proper specs and has the best performance on the noack test will give you the best results.  

Telling people to read their outdated manual and hope the oil they buy is good enough to keep their vehicle out of the maintenance bay is ridiculous.

I do too. On another forum In am on guys use a Wix Ford filter on an application where it is not the recommended application. There have been a few engine failures as a direct result of internal filter failures and not being the application gives Wix a way to deny any warranty. I tend to use OEM Donaldson or Fleetguard.

Re: Sn vs Sn+

Riddle me this:

Why would you want to keep blending, packaging and selling a more expensive product?

Serious question.  


Also, according to the API, packaging does not need to say SN+ on it. So by default, anything labeled SN, you can assume it’s SN plus. Because… SN+ is cheaper to make them SN.

Noack volatility has more to do with base oils, then additive packages.

Do you know how Noack works? Like.. why it’s actually a thing?

If not I can break it down.

Any proof of the claim that changing brand may increase wear? I have seem nothing like that in my life in fleets. We changed brands sometimes annually based on bids. Never saw any oil related issues in millions of miles on both gas and diesel equipment.

If people only knew how often motor oil formulations slightly change, they would lose their fucking mind.

Or how they change from region to region.

This is an oil question thread, not an oil expert thread.  And what had been debunked?   If sn oil was out there two years ago it’s still on the shelf somewhere, it’s still in a garage somewhere, and it’s still being put in vehicles as we speak. Sn+ also does not guarantee the best performance on noack testing which is important for preventing carbon buildup on direct injection only engines

The most popular vehicle in the the United States has every engine in it with direct injection and the most popular engines offered in it are turbocharged.  

That’s a lot of bumblefucks stumbling around looking for the cheapest oil they can find.  And they will find it and thanks to inferior advice they’ll assume it’s good to go and use it.

I keep asking:

Do you actually know why Noack is a thing?

Attached File

Yeah, but when there is an oil question thread on arfcom, the oil expert comes and answers the questions.

PAO based synthetics will be better in cold flow. But much more expensive.

Group 3+ like the pennzoil platinum line will be better in cold flow then Regular group 3s.  

This is what we use.

Make it a Gold one and you'll be OK.  No orange tho, very bad.

I use Wix XP filters  btw

Stock doesn’t change out in an instant. Manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, garages, and consumers don’t dump existing stock because there’s something new.  

Noack being designed for other reasons is irrelevant because it’s the best indicator we have for how quickly an oil will be moved to the intake valves of op’s engine.

I would like to learn more about base stocks and the testing done.  Also, why the variability among “full synthetics” and why don’t the manufacturers always include such information in their publicly available  literature?


If op were my ward I’d want to make sure they check out the specs listed on the specific bottles they end up using.  Hoping they have updated stock sitting in the bottles to help prevent lspi is not good enough for me.

Hoping that the oil happens to be among the best at preventing phase change in order to prolong the inevitable  and expensive decarboning process is not good enough for me.

If it is for others that’s their decision.

That’s where I’m coming from.

God forbid someone puts SN oil in their car, that's a guaranteed engine failure just waiting to happen, right?  Try to get some perspective.

He’s not wrong about oil.  Imo however, it’s wrong to assume that there’s all new oil sitting on every shelf that meets every spec op should be concerned with.  

That doesn’t cut it for the equipment at the 200 million dollar plant I’m responsible for and I assume it’s not good enough for op otherwise they wouldn’t bother asking and they’d simply use whatever they have sitting in their garage that says 5w-30 or whatever.

Op  asked and since they have a particularly sensitive engine I would assume they want to be certain.

So here is the deal.  I am not interested in debating you or making fun of you.  I am humorously trying to steer you in a direction.  You are debating one of the top petroleum industry professionals in America.  Maybe you don't know this.  

HE IS THE SME on oil in arfcom.  You won't run him off.  He is trying to educate you.  You undoubtedly have attempted some diligence.  But if you relaxed he could teach you some stuff.  

You continue debate like you have something to prove.  You would be better off debating widgets with him.  You might have a chance.  But with petroleum products there are only a few people on this site who are gonna be educated enough to hang with him.  Which is why I suggested you post some of your own creds.  

I hope you have a great day.....AND WELCOME GUN FELLOW GUN ENTHUSIAST...

@madcap3k

Op’s specific engine is prone to blowing up from using improper oil.  

Do you put the improper oil in your vehicle?  Do you have to pay 6,000+ when op’s engine blows?  

Why are you advising op to use engine oil that can cause his engine to blow?

There is no universal “best”

Needs vary widely based on application

And that certainty will come from Foxtrot08.   HE IS THAT GUY.  You haven't had the chance to learn that yet.  

Talk to him, not at him.  You could learn.

AMSoil is easily the best IMO. But I don't think it's worth it in most applications.

Where it is worth it is gear oil for cold or severe use.

Post your creds?  Maybe you have something of value, but its not internet articles and youtube videos.

Years ago Fram had sealing issues on the drain-back valves.  There was an audible difference in startup between a Fram filter and some other brands.

But much like the "what oil is best" threads ... doesn't really matter.  They all work well enough for the life of the vehicle.

Stock change out happens pretty quickly. If you read my previous posts and comprehend it. You would realize what I’m saying. By the time it gets the Sn+ label, they’ve been using the Sn+ additive package for months or years.

That way when the Change over happens officially, the consumer is already using the next generation product.

Noack is actually not the best indicator of it. It is - indicator. But not the single best anymore.


Noack, Astn D5800 - “The NOACK Volatility Test determines the evaporation loss of lubricants in high-temperature service. Accord- ing to the ASTM, “Evaporation may contribute to oil consumption in an engine and can lead to a change in the properties of an oil.” As with the TEOST test, low values in the NOACK Volatility Test are of particular benefit in modern, hot-running engines.
In the NOACK test, a candidate oil is exposed to heat and circulating air. Following 60 minutes, the remaining oil volume is weighed and compared to the original weight, with the difference reported as the percentage of weight lost. Results must be limited to 15 percent or less to meet the API SN and ILSAC GF-5 specifications.”

Now - you’re getting into the results of Group 3 / group 3+ / Pao and even in group 2 vs group 2+.


Group 2+ base oils have a very low NOACK rating. Sometimes lower then a group 3 because they go through the refining process again. And it strips out the light ends even more then the first go around. Plus most group 2+ feed stocks are former PCMO products.


Group 3+ - such as the SOPUS product - have a much lower Noack because of the fact they’re made via GTL - not the typical refinery process.


PAOs have a low NOACK as well. Because they’re, well, a polymer base really.

But every base stock has their own issues.  




But does it really matter?


According to chevron - No.

There’s no major deposit differences in their testing between N13% and N15%




As you might notice this is dated 2012. 8 years before GF6 became real.  And 6 years before Sn+.


Formulations of oils are continually changing. It’s not a set it and forget it thing. Why? Because base oils and base oil technologies are changing all the time.  Additives get better, as remember- most wear tests are a minimum. So companies want to exceed this.

You see most of this in Diesel engine oils, because the engines go so much longer.


Most of the deposit issues you see today are due to fuel. Not oil.


Oil helps control the deposit formulations under some of the rings.

You can lay off the hyperbole at any time.  It's not going to blow up, you're just posting silly hysterics at this point.

Look, I get that your worldview has been challenged. But that's no reason to keep looking foolish by pursuing this quixotic quest to prove that someone with a bottle of oil in their garage from 2 years ago has a ticking time bomb in their home.  Foxtrot08 has always graciously provided free jnformation to this membership that he charges the rest of the world for. He snaps back at foolishness because he rightly does not suffer fools gladly in his line of work.  You're not the first guy to furiously google a response to post trying to answer his challenge.

I’m the largest Ford Motorcraft distributor in the US.

By a lot.

Every year.

If You were correct about Op’s engine blowing,  I’d be getting sued every fucking day.

I've found that my 280K mile MB turbo diesel runs better on Shell Rotella T6 than anything else I've tried.  So that's what I use. Change it once a year as I don't put very many miles on the car.

Glad I stocked up earlier this year as it is currently out of stock or being price gouged upwards of $20/quart.

How about for a recent Turbo Diesel, more warm weather than cold.  Using Rotella T6 15w40 now.

Full synthetic 15w40 is a meme.


The idea of a full synthetic in a diesel is the lower cold flow performance, leading to fuel efficiency. And a more robust additive package to resist HTHS, for extended oil drains.

A full synthetic 15w40 does neither of those.


If you’re going to use T6 or a full synthetic CK4 product - use a 5w40.

Game, set, and match skippy.  

And now you know.the rest of the story

I’ve only referenced my own head for this argument.  I’m not posting anything about myself.  That’s why I can’t explain the specifics around the Noack test nor could I remember the name of the test until it was presented

The debate with foxtrot isn’t centered around the merits of certain oils, it’s centered upon the acquisition of said proper oil and the results seen in op’s specific application.  Those are entirely different realms.  

Real world results with op’s engine have lead to these new specs and have lead to the use of the noack test as an analogue for how much and how quickly carbon will build up on op’s intake valves.   One can’t assume that op wants “good enough” and wants to rely on the assumption that when he goes out to his garage the oil he has is good enough, or failing that the dusty oil bottle we’ve all seen at the local getting spot is up to spec.  

I have no doubt that foxtrot knows a lot about oil, production of oil, additives, etc. that’s not entirely what this thread is about.  I made suggestions for oil and those suggestions are not counter to what foxtrot has recommended (except for the use of noack as an indicator for this application of which I doubt foxtrot is an expert) hence his credentials as an oil guy or whatever don’t come into play.

I am personally not a chemical engineer.


However I am referencing data from the largest chemical companies on earth, that say you’re wrong.

Chevron (Oronite) and Afton chemical say you’re wrong.

So I mean. You’re welcome to take their test results up with them. Not me.

"Best" Motorcycle Oil for KTM LC8 1290

V-twin, 10k redline, wet clutch, oil shared with transmission

10w50 is recommended

Go!

(I know, Motorex, right?)

What about Motul, Silkolene, others?

Rotella T6!

I did the 1st oil change a bit "early" (okay, a lot early) recently just to go ahead and get full synthetic in it; used Vavoline full synthetic, but am open to other options.

The filter...
Owners manual says 910s
I look at filter on it from factory and it's not a 910s.
According to some online parts places 910s is not the correct filter.

Anyway, I got a 910s and a Mobil filter both of which are the same dimension as the filter that came on it from the factory. The factory filter was on tight, real tight.
Attached File

VQ35de - 60k miles 6 speed. Just delivered

Stay with Mobil 1?

Thank you!

@Foxtrot08

Sure. Mobil 1 is the bar that all other oils have to meet or exceed in terms of performance.

So yeah, if you’re using it - why stop?

Attached File


This has happened?

Criteria for best?
Attached File

The main problem with the 2.3L eco boost today is fuel dilution.  In 5-7k miles, the fuel dilution drops it down from a 5w30 to about a w20. We’ve seen this a lot of 2.3L EB engines.

So running super extended (10k+) oil drains could become problematic if your engine is getting diluted heavily with fuel.

The counter argument is: Ford knows this.  And that’s why they recommend a 5w30 over a 5w20 or 0w20. I find things argument very believable.

Good info, however these charts and fuel used are not relevant to the major issues that commonly arise with op’s engine.   Specifically the issue I’ve mentioned multiple times.

There is no fuel that washes over the intake valves.

vaporized oil settles on the intake valves after coming through the pcv system and turns to carbon.

carbon build up on pistons and how carbon builds up mostly from fuel is entirely irrelevant to what we’ve been discussing.

Again, op’s car does not have fuel going over his intake valves which is where carbon problems routinely present themselves on this engine.

You’re right though that it’s likely that op will acquire or has acquired oil that is up to date on its specs.   He should double check with you if he has old stock.

Pennzoil Ultra Platinum and Fram XG Ultra filters. This will bring out a lot of butt hurt.

I guess they didn’t need to address low speed preignition by changing oil specs then huh?  Must have been a made up problem.  Ford engineers and mechanics will be very surprised to hear that.

Op doesn’t have to go back too far to find hundreds of posts on his car’s forums showing just the opposite.

You’re out of your element on this and your post about carbon on pistons and fuel shows it.

Why doesn't running the engine at temp for sufficient amounts of time keep the fuel dilution at bay? Obviously if people are taking fairly short trips this doesn't happen but say you only have a 10 minute drive to work each day but you like to take long drives on the weekend, why isn't the accumulated fuel evaporating out of the oil on the long drive?

They are all probably good enough but availability may be the issue. So it makes sense to stockpile.

I have to walk by it everyday and didn’t want to look at that dumpy ass Mobil 1 jug. Amsoil has the best looking boxes and bottles and it’s more than good enough.